User talk:Atul Talashikar

Welcome!

Hello, Atul Talashikar, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! --Geniac (talk) 02:18, 4 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

May 2013

Welcome to Wikipedia. At least one of your recent edits, such as the edit you made to Anuraag (1973 film), did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at the welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make some test edits, please use the sandbox for that. Thank you. Since you changed the file name of File:Anuraag 1972 film, Soundtrack.jpg and File:Anuraag, 1972 film.jpg they were removed from the article, and were up for deletion, now restored. To avoid this request for renaming the files, always use Template:Rename media so that the image files can be renamed instead. Thanks! Ekabhishek^talk 04:22, 4 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

When moving pages, as you did to Dushman (1972 film), please remember to fix any double redirects. These can create slow, unpleasant experiences for the reader, waste server resources, and make the navigational structure of the site confusing. Please also check all the pages you have recently moved. Thank you. Ekabhishek^talk 04:30, 4 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, articles should not be moved, as you did to Apna Desh, without good reason. This has been reverted by me and the rest Kati Patang , Amar Prem , Aan Milo Sajna and Haathi Mere Saathi by User:Materialscientist. They need to have a name that is both accurate and intuitive. Wikipedia has some guidelines in place to help with this. Generally, a page should only be moved to a new title if the current name doesn't follow these guidelines. Also, if a page move is being discussed, consensus needs to be reached before anybody moves the page. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. At present there is no article which used the name, so it is not required. Ekabhishek^talk 05:07, 4 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Ekabhishek. I noticed that you made a change to an article, List of Bollywood films of 1972, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Changes you have made are not mentioned in the Box Office list currently given as a reference. Ekabhishek^talk 17:41, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to List of Bollywood films of 1971, 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. You have two films from list, without given any reason in edit summary, or giving any new reference to support the deletion. Ekabhishek^talk 18:35, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing, as you did at Kati Patang. Your edits have been reverted or removed.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive until the dispute is resolved through consensus. Continuing to edit disruptively may result in your being blocked from editing. BollyJeff | talk 13:00, 10 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Release dates

The wikipedia policy is that the earliest release date is the one used; see WP:FILMRELEASE. If Box Office India (and most other sources) say a film was released in year A and gives box office figures for year A, and the awards are given in year B (which is always the next year), it doesn't make sense for you to change the release date to year B. Okay? Now stop making moves without consulting the talk page first and getting consensus. BollyJeff | talk 13:10, 10 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Every one one of the following sources, published books and encyclopedia's on Hindi films, lists Kati Patang as a 1970 film. Click on the next button to see all refs to the film in these books. I could not find any of these types of reliable sources claiming 1971. I also have not yet found it's exact release date, but it appears to be late in December 1970. Perhaps for that reason it did not qualify for the 1971 Filmfare awards, which was just a month or two later, so it was qualified for 1972 FF.

I hope this helps, or should I add all these sources to the article. Where did you find your source? BollyJeff | talk 23:16, 11 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, so you are right and the authors of all those books are encyclopedias wrong?!? How superior-minded and obstinate can a person be? If they all say it is a 1970 film, it is a 1970 film dude. Wikipedia requires sources to verify its text. The best I can do for you is add a sentence saying that 'although it is regarded as a 1970 film, it was actually released in xx on Jan xx, 1971'. But a source is needed. You can't just say 'because I saw it in a museum somewhere'. Find a source. BollyJeff | talk 19:02, 12 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Atul, saw your note, since you are already have an ongoing discussion here with Bollyjeff, its better you take up the issue further with him, if he is ok with it, that is. I am sure some headway can be made.--Ekabhishek^talk 12:38, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I would prefer to move it to the Kati Patang talk page to get more input from other editors. Is it okay if I cut and paste the discussion there? Or maybe the film project would be a good place since it involves more than one film. BollyJeff | talk 12:50, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

For Kati Patang, the talk page would be fine, go for Rfc later, if you want to or WP:DR. --Ekabhishek^talk 16:59, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Could you upload those files somewhere, so that everyone can see them? BollyJeff | talk 12:50, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but I don't want to put my email on a public place like this. BollyJeff | talk 15:14, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

January 2014

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Rajesh Khanna. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Administrators can block users from editing if they repeatedly vandalize. Thank you.

The year 1972 is not supported in the sources, both of which say 1971. Please do not change sourced information. Thank you. bonadea contributions talk 13:27, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia's rules have not changed since January, and the sources still say that same thing they said then. Please do not change sourced information. You are more than welcome to start a discussion on the article's talk page and try to get consensus for a change, however. That discussion should not take place on user talk pages, but on Talk:Rajesh Khanna. Thank you. --bonadea contributions talk 08:33, 2 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

June 2014

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to Rajesh Khanna. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia.

Achieve consensus on the talk page FIRST, before you start changing the text. It is going to be extremely difficult for you to get a discussion going unless you start a new section at the bottom of the talk page. Inserting comments in a four-year-old section is going to make it difficult for other editors to notice the comments.

The indianexpress archived link does say 1968-72, but that goes against four other sources, some of which actually mention which films are included in the count. You must not change the sourced information as you did when you changed the list of films - that list actually has a source.

Once again, discuss on the article's talk page first. Thank you. bonadea contributions talk 10:26, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your comment on my talk page. Please take a moment to read this information. We can never base what we write in Wikipedia on our own research - that is explicitly prohibited. We base it on what we find in reliable sources.

Please do not discuss this issue on user talk pages. Use the article's talk page to discuss it. Please make sure that you achieve consensus before you change the sourced information in the article. Thank you. --bonadea contributions talk 10:44, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

December 2014

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Rajesh Khanna.

Seriously, you need to stop changing sourced information without a) providing sources that suport your change and b) discussing the changes and achieving consensus for your version. Are you under the impression that Wikipedia's guidelines and policies concerning verifiability have changed since this summer? They haven't. bonadea contributions talk 08:11, 12 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 24

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Rajesh Khanna, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dushman. 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) 09:47, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

July 2019

Hello, I'm LiberatorG. I wanted to let you know that one or more external links you added 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. Thank you. LiberatorG (talk) 00:17, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]