User talk:Vithurgod

Welcome to Wikipedia! Drop by the Teahouse anytime for a cup of tea, or some help with editing![edit]

Hello! Vithurgod, you are invited to join other new editors and friendly hosts in the Teahouse. An awesome place to meet people, ask questions and learn more about Wikipedia. Please join us! Ocaasi (talk) 16:37, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

April 2012[edit]

Your recent editing history at Ranina Reddy shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in you 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. 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. Drmies (talk) 04:54, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits[edit]

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also 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 useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 05:27, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You used the {{Help me}} tag but did not ask a question. Please write out your question and replace the {{Help me}} tag when you are done, and someone will be along to help. Alternatively, you can ask your question at the new contributors help desk, the help desk, or join the #wikipedia-en-help IRC help channel to get real-time assistance. Click here for instant access.

What do you need help with? --Mrmatiko (talk) 08:02, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring, as you did at Ranina Reddy. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Spinning Spark 08:28, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring 3 minutes after being warned not to is being particularly disruptive. If you continue in this vain you will be permanently blocked. Spinning Spark 08:37, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Vithurgod (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Please Unblock me. I have now understood that I should not be modifying edits thrice within 24 hours. I am learning the Art of Editing. Give me another chance. I am a learner.. I am learning. Thanks. Vithurgod (talk) 11:44, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I am not sure that you understand that edit-warring can be a single edit. This is a very very short block, designed to protect the project until you are better aware of WP:CONSENSUS (and how to achieve it), and the bold, revert, DISCUSS cycle. 24 hours (or less now) should be appropriate time for you to read, reflect, and fully understand those key documents. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 12:01, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

{{unblock reviewed | Ok Understood... I will wait for the 24 hours. Thanks Vithurgod

Here's the thing, though -- if you simply try to revert the same material into the article without gaining consensus for it on the article talk page, you will likely end up blocked again even if you adhere to WP:3RR. Your edits have been rejected, and rather than simply repeating them you need to convince other editors on the talk page that they are in fact desirable. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 13:31, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

{{unblock reviewed | I am waiing for my Block to be removed. Please do the needful while I explain the logic behind my edits Thanks Vithurgod

{{unblock reviewed | When would I be unblocked ?... Waiting... Thanks Vithurgod

Your recent edit[edit]

With regard to this edit at the Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring, you appear to be having a content dispute and the Talk:Ranina Reddy is a more appropriate setting for such a discussion. I would advise that you continue your discussion there as it appears that you are somewhat to blame in this edit-warring cycle.
Best Wishes Ankh.Morpork 15:02, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok Sir. Thanks. Vithurgod (talk) 15:04, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If such steps do not prove helpful, there are several ways in which you can seek dispute resolution including use of the Dispute resolution noticeboard. However, first try and address the problems on the article talk page. Good luck.
Best Wishes Ankh.Morpork 15:09, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If no one challenges your edit, it is not necessary to seek approval for it - it will stand by default. If, however, it is challenged or removed, then we expect the issue to be discussed on the article talk page and the article itself left alone until consensus is reached. Spinning Spark 15:28, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your request for assistance[edit]

You requested my assistance on my talk page regarding the removal of the Ranina Reddy discography. As I have said to you before, these issues should be discussed on the article talk page. Outside help should only be sought when editors on the page cannot reach consensus after discussion. User:Bbb23 removed the discography with the edit summary "Material is mostly unsourced except to links that are probable copyright vios." You can see this yourself by clicking on the history tab of the article.

Copyright violation is a serious issue on Wikipedia. We are not allowed to link to sites that do this, see WP:COPYLINK. On the face of it, the user may well be right about the site - it offers free streaming and downloads and user sharing with no indication that it has permission to do this. Some options open to you;

Explain on the article talk page why you think this site is acceptable and try to convince other editors of the page.
Discuss with User talk:Bbb23 directly to try to understand their objection.
Find better references. It surely cannot be difficult to find acceptable reliable sources for a discography - for instance from the website of the artist's record label(s).
Only when discussion is completely stalled is it time to ask more editors to get involved. This can be done, for example, through the WP:RfC process. But please do not use this until you are quite sure that you have 100% solid suitable references and you still cannot get agreement through discussion.

Spinning Spark 09:47, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

@Spinning Spark.. Thanks for your Suggestion and Advise.. I would follow the same.

Simply demanding the material is put back in as you have just done is not following my advice. Please read it again carefully, you need to find better sources, or else explain why the objections to your current sources are wrong. Spinning Spark 12:03, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

My discography removal at Ranina Reddy[edit]

I removed it and self-reverted five minutes later, having re-read the policy I was trying to cite, as the link would have been inappropriate as an external link. Bbb23 later removed it as a problem with the sopyright violations for the site, ~~which you restored~~ and you then put it back in unsourced again. Wikipedia takes copyright issues very seriously. You should self-revert and seek consensus for the change and approval of that site as a reference. Continuing to insert the same material without consensus approval beforehand is Wikipedia:Disruptive editing even if you avoid technically violating Wikipedia:Edit warring's 3 revert rule limit, and can result in Blocking or Banning. Articles are not meant to be exhaustively detailed lists of every possible fact, and living artist filmographies and discographies are frequently limited to the most successful item per year, plus those the artist won awards for. I have looked at other Indian artists, and while some have separate article discographies and others are extensive, they are for singers with far more awards and longer careers; regardless, see Wikipedia:Other stuff exists, on the list of arguments to avoid. When starting a new section on a page, use the 'New section' tab; the discussion you included it in is about copyvios. Dru of Id (talk) 11:32, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

@Dru of Id.... This Singer also has Exhasutive LIst of Songs to her Credit. She has more than 30 Songs and pls see the same in the Table that I added. There are no Copyright issues here. These are the songs sung by her Vithurgod (talk) 05:18, 14 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 13[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited Ranina Reddy, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Saroja (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:34, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Ranina Reddy Discography[edit]

As I said, we do not include full lists in articles; even separate article discographies are rarely complete. While I think one per year per language would highlight her versatility, I can't find one online that shows which ones were her most successful ones, and ones like [1] seem to be unattributed copies back to Wikipedia content [2]. If it had been sourced to that site when it was added, we would know which came first; now it could be us copying them copying ourselves, so we can't just add it back. Dru of Id (talk) 12:07, 14 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

@Dru of Id She has sung a Lot of songs... There are various Websites which have evidence of it.. For eg : http://www.muzigle.com/artist/22234. I will list so many websites which have proved that her songs have been succesful. Vithurgod (talk) 12:20, 14 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that, but I haven't found one which shows her most successful songs by year, which would allow a short, concise, non-promotional Discography section. They either show everything, or mirror previous versions of Wikipedia. If there's no way to tell who copied whom, they are unincludable, which is one of the reasons that sourcing is important in the first place. Unsourced lists will be reverted, lists that appear to be previous versions of Wikipedia will be reverted, and a full list will be reverted, so a short list of things she's actually known for needs to be sourced. Dru of Id (talk) 12:31, 14 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Vithurgod. You have new messages at Spinningspark's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Vithhurgod, it is now quite clear that your most recent edit did not have consensus. I do not want to have to block you again. Please self-revert the edit and discuss on the article talk page. Spinning Spark 13:54, 5 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Vithurgod. You have new messages at Spinningspark's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Indenting[edit]

This is not a big deal, but I just wanted to point out to you that we indicate who we are replying to on talk pages by indenting, not by using the @ symbol, seeHelp:Using talk pages#Indentation. You probably picked this up from one use by me, but that was an unusual case where it would have otherwise been unclear who I was talking to. Spinning Spark 20:13, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Tables[edit]

You can get help for creating tables at Help:Table. An easier approach, rather than doing it from scratch, would be to copy an existing table and edit its content. Spinning Spark 10:44, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You may also want to take a look at WP:CITE, one of the complaints about your posts has been that you do not provide citations in the actual material posted. Within a table, citations can be added to text just as it is in the body of an article. Sometimes, if the reference applies to the whole line of a table and not just a single cell, we will give the table a column just for the reference. See this artice for example. Spinning Spark 17:25, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]