TUSC token e80b809c8cc344eed212d9db46506234

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

Sources reliable

Hello, the source of the website The Richest is realiable, is one page about sale, earnings and net worth. I just want to contribute in Wikipedia with references reliable. Romberd (talk) 12:37, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Romberd: First, you are avoiding a block, so you need to address this issue before you continue editing Wikipedia. Second, you seem to have trouble communicating in English so I repeat my suggestion that you may be better contributing to a Wikipedia using your own language. Third, please familiarize yourself with WP:BRD: if you add material (being bold is a not a bad thing) and someone reverts it, you discuss it with them, preferably on the article's talk page. By restoring the material over and over after being reverted you are being disruptive. This was explained to you nine (!) times already, and you actually got blocked for doing it, so what do you do? Ignore it all, open another account and repeat the same thing again? You wrote here that you understand the reason you were blocked, but it is apparent that you either don't understand it or simply don't care. --Muhandes (talk) 12:56, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Muhandes: "yes I understand the reason", but only that you understand that I edi with reliable sounces, and edit because editing is not locked. I understand that I made mistake, but i want to fix them. Romberd (talk) 01:40, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Romberd: Reliable sources are not the main issue. The main issue is that you are not showing willingness to collaborate on building an encyclopedia. Let me give you another example: look at this revision history. I repeatedly explain that being featured on the soundtrack of a game falls under WP:SONGTRIVIA and you ignore me. You reintroduce the same material a fourth time and on the same edit you ignore another comment I made here: unsourced genre. You may be right and I may be wrong (I often am), but if you are reverted you can't reintroduce the same material. Read the edit summary, see what the concern was, and address the issue or discuss it at the talk page if you don't agree.
By the way, to ease interaction please see Help:Talk and Help:Introduction to talk pages. Note the indentation. You don't need to ping me on my own talk page. --Muhandes (talk) 15:23, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting RfC closure at Talk:Banaras_Hindu_University

Hello, since there are no more comments for about 7 seven days, and the incorrect image of "founders" [1] needs to be removed from the article, therefore I request you to close the RfC appropriately. You may also want to appropriately mark File:The_founder_members_of_BHU.jpg for being incorrectly descriptive as the image of "founder members of BHU". Thanks, User4edits (talk) 07:52, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@User4edits: I can't close the discussion because I have a strong opinion on the matter which I already voiced. But even if not, I would not close the discussion because instead of discussing the only thing that matters when building an encyclopedia, i.e., what do reliable sources say about the subject, you have turned this into a matter of what is right and what is wrong, viz. a matter of opinion. In matters of opinion, everyone deserves one, and all opinions are equal. I think that in doing so, you are doing the subject a great ill service. Even if this is not the case, you make other editors (like myself) think that you may have an agenda. --Muhandes (talk) 08:49, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Muhandes: I don't know how discussing right and wrong, based on facts and sources is a "matter of opinion". Most importantly, the reason why I had to do the RfC was that an editor was repeatedly putting the same image without any source as "founder members". All I wanted was for the Article to be correctly informing the readers. As for me having an "agenda", is your opinion, and you are free to opine whatever suits you. 12:04, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
@User4edits: You are assuming there is one truth and so there is right or wrong. This is why this argument cannot be decided - what you see as right, another editor sees as wrong. I don't think we are here to decide what is "correct". We are here to report what reliable sources say. Since no reliable sources call them founders, we will not call them founders, as simple as that. Well, I guess we will agree to disagree. Happy editing! --Muhandes (talk) 13:25, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the Russian certification

Hi Muhandes, hope you're doing well, I'm just here to let you know that I've found something odd regarding the Russian certification thresholds. To my knowledge, the threshold for the international albums released in Russia throughout the 2000s were (10,000/20,000/200,000) for (Gold/Platinum/Diamond), yet for some reason, albums such as Crazy Hits or FutureSex/LoveSounds despite being certified Diamond, are only listed with 60,000 units. What do you think about it? Moh8213 (talk) 21:02, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Moh8213: Do you have any source for that? I know the person who wrote that code, it's 12-years younger me. A handsome young fellow, but still one that sticks to sources. If I wrote 60,000, I had a source that said 60,000 units, at least for the early 2000s. I see now that the link to that source is dead, but I trust old me. Nevertheless, if you have a reliable source that says otherwise, do let me know. --Muhandes (talk) 21:14, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I've found 2 sources that can support my claim, this one shows the best selling albums in Russia and it also shows you the certification levels that launched in Russia since 2003, when you scroll down you will see the list of the best selling international albums. There's also this source that shows the best selling records and artists in the USSR and Russia, scroll down till you see the list of the top selling foreign albums 2003-2012, there you will see the 200,000 unit figure for the Diamond cert. Moh8213 (talk) 20:03, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Moh8213: I'm afraid both of these website are considered WP:SPS and unreliable. charmasters.org is actually listed at WP:NOTRSMUSIC. bestsellingalbums.org is a rather new website, I believe from 2020, so there was no discussion about it yet, but it does not divulge its sources nor the identity of the organization behind it. It also seems to mirror some Wikipedia lists. Do you have any objection for me moving this discussion to somewhere more public like Template talk:Certification Table Entry? --Muhandes (talk) 08:13, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I really don't mind if you wanna move this discussion anywhere else. But my overall opinion is that the 200,000 units for the Diamond certification is much more logical, cuz it doesn't make any sense that the highest certification (Diamond) would be the same as a 3× Platinum (60,000). Moh8213 (talk) 16:29, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Moh8213: I'm not sure why you don't find 3× Platinum logical. This is Exactly what they do for domestic. It makes much less sense to have 3× Platinum for domestic and 10× Platinum for imported. Also, from 2010 it was 3×, so it makes much more sense it was 3× before as well. Besides, 3× is a reasonable number. In Belgium Diamond is 2× Platinum, in France it is less than 2×, in Germany it is 2.5×, in in Hungary 2×. I can go on... --Muhandes (talk) 16:37, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I said 3× Platinum (60,000) because the Russian Diamond certification is also equals to (60,000), take a look at this archived database of international albums that were released in 2006, look carefully at the top 2 certs, you can see that FutureSex/LoveSounds is certified Diamond (60,000) and Loose is certified 6× Platinum (120,000), see what I mean? Even though that FS/LSs listed at the top of the list yet sold less compared to the album below it, same thing goes with Crazy Hits, either way, based on the archived database we have, both of these albums are the only ones to receive the Diamond certification. In fact, that's how I noticed that something is odd regarding the Diamond figure, especially given the fact that the certifications are listed in ascending order. And btw believe me you can have a 3× Platinum (domestic) and 10× Platinum (imported). Moh8213 (talk) 18:36, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Moh8213: Your logic convinced me. I copied the discussion here and lets see what other editors think. --Muhandes (talk) 08:39, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lol! Didn't think that you'd get convinced this easily, anyways thanks for your time! Moh8213 (talk) 09:39, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Moh8213: Yes, people don't expect this, but I have a long history of being easily convinced, especially by logic. At work this really drives people crazy Happy editing! --Muhandes (talk) 09:47, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Mail call

Hello, Muhandes. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((You've got mail)) or ((ygm)) template.

Bishonen | tålk 08:48, 2 February 2022 (UTC).[reply]

@Bishonen: Answered you via email. --Muhandes (talk) 11:06, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Technical Barnstar
I've seen your work on song articles and fixing and enhancing their certification citations. I would like to give you this Barnstar to show my appreciation to your work. Cheers! ɢᴀʙʙʏᴍɪx01 05:31, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@GabbyMix01: Thank you! --Muhandes (talk) 08:02, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Changes by itsmeuksh

Sir changes are must because there is dignity and designation attached with such post and these are like principal of degree college must be prof and doctor I m not writing unessential things so plz don't revert it I m also HOD in that college and changes were done according to direction of higher authorities Plz do not revert it 2409:4053:2011:DCD1:0:0:1853:90B0 (talk) 00:55, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Itsmeuksh: I'm sorry but this is not possible. We have a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Deviating from this style, disturbs uniformity among articles and may cause readability or accessibility problems. Adding honorifics and academic titles is against the manual of style and I will therefore ask (for the third time) that you stop adding them. I also ask that you edit while logged into your account. --Muhandes (talk) 07:35, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

sir the manual of style is not working on the kkpg college etawah uttar pradesh Indi as i have seen that Dr and other credentials are used and validated by wki pedia i have read the instruction i m only changes the essentials not non authentic information if u r working on indian colleges information then u must have knowledge that what degree or designation provided to that post -- aprincipal is always a professor and doctor if u not like that anyone can change it then please change it principal = prof. Dr. shailendra kumar sharma and link it with vidwan portal as i have linked it earlier otherwise allow me to change it.it is not a prestige issue u r doing good but plz change it thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Itsmeuksh (talkcontribs) 21:07, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Itsmeuksh: There are other articles which don't follow the MOS and if you point them out they will be fixed, or better yet, you can fix them yourself. It was quite difficult to understand what you mean by "kkpg college etawah uttar pradesh Indi", but assuming you referred to Karm Kshetra Post Graduate College, I fixed that too. Linking with an external website is against this policy, I will add more details on your talk page. If you continue your disruptive editing you will be blocked. --Muhandes (talk) 22:02, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

link to vidwan portal

sir actually the external link belong to that person's detail who is the principal appointed in january 2022 in the college and the vidwan portal is government of Indian -- uttar pradesh state university portal and it has all the research scholar information and current designation .plz it is a request that write the correct designation professor Doctor as mentioned in vidwan portal before principal name.i don't have any dispute to any editor but i know that i m writing the correct words because i m in this field since 2006 so it is a request to u plz write the correct words prof. Dr. thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Itsmeuksh (talkcontribs) 22:47, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Itsmeuksh: I'm sorry, but you don't seem to be reading the guidelines I am pointing you to, so I will try to be clearer. When you see text in blue it means it is a link - you can follow that link to see the guidelines I am talking about. Here is one: External links guidelines. Click that link and it will take you there. You wills see that we don't allow external links in Wikipedia. Also, please click on the following words: MOS:DOCTOR. This will give you an overview of why we don't add "Dr." or "Prof." before names. Surely you understand that in order to build an encyclopedia we need to follow rules and guidelines. --Muhandes (talk) 23:05, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

make a new page of prof dr shailendra kumar sharma

sir, can i create a page of my college principal in wikipedia and write all the qualification and other achievements in that page just like mulayam singh yadav as u create a link on hover it shows details. thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Itsmeuksh (talkcontribs) 19:21, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Itsmeuksh: If you are asking whether an article about Shailendra Kumar Sharma can exist in Wikipedia, then the answere lies in WP:NACADEMIC, WP:NBIO and WP:GNG, in that order. Read those guidelines carefully (click on the links to see the guidelines) and determine whether Sharma satisfies any of those requirements. If you are asking whether you can create that article, then I suggest you go through the WP:AFC process (again, click that blue line to see what's behind it). I also left you a note at your talk page (which you should never ignore) about conflict of interests. Please read that note carefully before continuing to contribute. --Muhandes (talk) 08:35, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

References

can you explain how I am "uninterested" after doing what you said about adding proper references --Yeeta Skeeta

Answered at your talk page. --Muhandes (talk) 18:43, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Muhandes, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Deji (Youtuber). Yeeta Skeeta, I'm being nice: I suppose I could have simply deleted it as spam. Drmies (talk) 18:30, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Drmies: What can I say, I tried. At least I can tell them "I told you so". --Muhandes (talk) 18:43, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Foxy Brown Discography/Ill Na Na Entertainment.

Everything included in Foxy Brown's Discography wiki page is accurate with sources included, so why delete the information? I will add more sources if needed. Concerning the Ill Na Na Entertainment wiki page it was a real record label and is on the back of her album covers Chyna Doll & Broken Silence. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FoxyData (talkcontribs) 18:49, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@FoxyData: Thanks for communicating. I left you many messages on your talk page and you ignored them. You do know you have a talk page for communicating, you found your way to mine pretty easily.
Regarding the sourcing, please don't add numbers without reliable sources. A number, however accurate it is, is worth nothing if it cannot be verified. also, Please don't add numbers from certifications, the column is for sourced sales, not for certifications, there is another column for that.
Regarding Ill Na Na Entertainment, please read WP:NORG. I don't think it satisfied the requirements. --Muhandes (talk) 18:56, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

Hi Muhandes, a user you reverted before, and warned about it, is still doing the same massive removals using the same false edit summaries he was warned about. Can you please revert his vandalisms like you did last time? Thank you so much for your time--146.241.192.13 (talk) 09:52, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Anonymous, I am sorry but I am not interested, so please stop bothering me with this issue. Unlike you, at least that editor has the decency to take responsibility for their edits. For all I know, you might be the LTA they are reverting and this might be some private agenda you have against them. I don't appreciate editors hopping IPs to avoid WP:BOOMERANG and making accusations without revealing their editing history. --Muhandes (talk) 10:52, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I take responsibility for my edits. This is not me trying to get revenge, this is me trying to avoid messy removals on other pages. I'm not editing pages and IP hopping to avoid boomerang, I'm just trying to take care of pages that are receiving wrong removals. Plus I don't understand how is he taking responsibility for his wrong edits when he literally keep on making them--176.246.83.173 (talk) 11:53, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]