User talk:Michael banias

June 2020

Hello, I'm Thanoscar21. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Rocket Singh: Salesman of the Year, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Thanoscar21_{talk, contribs} 23:35, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Rocket Singh: Salesman of the Year, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Crazy Boy 826 23:42, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing.

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, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
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.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. Crazy Boy 826 23:44, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia. Thanoscar21_{talk, contribs} 23:49, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Problematic edits

Hi there, I've reverted your recent edits at Ranveer Singh, because they did not appear constructive to me. Krimuk 2.0 also felt that they were problematic, which is why they also reverted them. When you are reverted, your recourse is to open a discussion on the article's talk page to seek consensus for the change you want, not to resubmit the content. See WP:BRD. Resubmitting this content is considered edit-warring, which isn't allowed.

Note also that with regard to these changes, we don't care what random blogs or faceless websites you find have to say about film finances. We only care what reliable mainstream sources with established reputations for fact-checking and accuracy have to say about any given subject. Since anybody can start a blog and publish whatever they want, you can understand why this would be a concern. See WP:ICTFSOURCES for a general list of sources considered good and bad. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 22:42, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

October 2020

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia by deliberately introducing incorrect information, as you did at Thugs of Hindostan. - Arjayay (talk) 08:41, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Language

Re this edit, "Indian film actor" is ambiguous as it does not indicate any language/film industry. Therefore, its necessary to mention which language they work. This is in contrast to American actor/French actress/Japanese film director which automatically implies they work in English/French/Japanese language films. Thanks -- Ab207 (talk) 07:53, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

March 2023

Your recent editing history at Ranveer Singh shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

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 do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 07:04, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]