User talk:Arjayay#Informations missing

{{User:ClueBot III/DoNotArchiveUntil|1758140976}}

[http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/broadcasted The Wiktionary definition of Broadcasted] states the use is sometimes [https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Appendix:Glossary#proscribed proscribed], so it should not be used. The word also appears on Wikipedia:Lists_of_common_misspellings/B

Broadcasted appears in some dictionaries, but others, e.g. [http://chambers.co.uk/search/?query=Broadcasted&title=21st Chambers] state "Sorry, no entries for Broadcasted were found".

Broadcast appears in all dictionaries, and should be used as COMMONALITY - "Wikipedia tries to find words that are common to all varieties of English".

A May 2023 search for [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ASearch&profile=advanced&search=broadcast&fulltext=Search&ns0=1&ns14=1&ns100=1&profile=advanced&nsToken=b33e24818cf6690dd6f1f7d2c5444fff%2B%5C Broadcast] gave over 234,000 uses, compared with a search for [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Search&limit=20&offset=0&redirs=1&ns0=1&ns14=1&ns100=1&search=%22broadcasted%22 Broadcasted] which gave just 99.

Of these, 16 are redirects to "Broadcast" articles, 14 refer to a 2015 Canadian TV award and 5 relate to a 1924 cartoon. The rest are in quotations.

----

----

__TOC__

Hello, @Arjayay. Can you please help me edit my Digital Outdoor Menu Board page? I would like more information to be added and better citations. Thank you. Floating Orb (talk) 04:30, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

:Sorry, Floating Orb, I know nothing about Digital Outdoor Menu Boards and am not really interested in them, whilst I don't have enough time to edit articles I am interested in. My sole edit to that page was to remove a double "the", and you don't need to know about a subject to remove a double word. Best wishes - Arjayay (talk) 10:35, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

I'm unsure how you caught both of my duplicate words today. Good job. MattressSmith (talk) 15:35, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

:Thanks MattressSmith - it helps to have a very high boredom threshold !! - Arjayay (talk) 15:57, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

{{-}}

{{User QAIbox/auto|years=Nine}}

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:50, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

Can you please look and add watchlist to some kannada film articles, because some Ip users added unsourced and financial box office changes without sources, any changes please reverted among this film

::Kariya (film)

::Kalasipalya (film)

::Ayya (2005 Kannada film)

::Gaja (film)

::Arjun (2008 film)

::Navagraha (film)

::Saarathi

::Hebbuli

::The Villain (2018 film)

::Bulbul (film)

::Mr. Airavata

::Jaggu Dada

::Doddmane Hudga

::Maanikya

::Kirik Party

::Kotigobba 2

::Kotigobba 3

::Pogaru

::Porki

::The Devil (upcoming film)

Rohiths90 (talk) 09:06, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

:Hi Rohiths90, I'm afraid that all Indian films suffer from IP editors adding/changing unsourced/untrue figures, not just Kannada films. As can be seen from these articles' history pages, I have already corrected such edits on most of the pages you have listed above, and several are already on my watchlist. However, I have about 6,500 pages on my watchlist and have trouble keeping up with them all, so false figures will, occasionally, slip through. Best wishes - Arjayay (talk) 10:56, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

Hi, [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/2402:8100:2B6B:72F4:E40D:77FF:FE49:4FFC this] is an IP-sock of [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Truthfindervert/Archive this sockfarm], known for writing incomprehensible edit summaries. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 12:02, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

:Thanks Fylindfotberserk - not one of my "usual" socks - Arjayay (talk) 12:04, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

::Welcome. This person most likely belongs Jat caste and can be found in Jat related articles, as well as those of Haryana, Punjab and nearby areas where this community is found. The edit summaries make them DUCKY. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 12:08, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Indian_diaspora&diff=prev&oldid=1290931100 2600:480A:4A51:9300:B307:3EAF:FF7E:9B4 (talk) 21:11, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

Hi! It happens many times that I get 'edit conflict' when I try to save my edits for typos on long articles I have created shortly before, and you edited in the same time. ı kindly ask you to take time for your edits, because all my work becomes useless, it is time wasting for me, and it annoys me much. You can wait a couple of days for your edit. Thanks. CeeGee 18:46, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

:Sorry CeeGee, there is no way I can tell whether you are editing, or not. I normally perform 200-300 edits per day, so, when I see a problem, I cannot just file it and return to it sometime later, as that would be huge waste of time, and leave the problem visible to the public for the intervening period. Edit conflicts are not difficult to resolve, one method is to publish your changes as a separate tab, which will show if there is a conflict, whilst retaining your changed text, so, if there is a problem you can resolve it before publishing.
I assume you are referring to my correction at Havza Atatürk's House Museum? Rather than creating a new article in main-space, perhaps you should use your sandbox, or a user-page, and check your article before publishing it? I don't correct typos in sandboxes of user pages - although I occasionally do in draft articles. - Best wishes - Arjayay (talk) 19:05, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

Hello! I am apart of Midd-West School District's Esports team. I can confirm that it is official, and I have proof of it. SonXo (talk) 22:33, 24 May 2025 (UTC)

:Hi SonXo Wikipedia isn't interested in who you are, where you are from, what you know, or what is on social media.
Wikipedia is only interested in what has been published in reliable, independent sources, issued by a publisher with a reputation for fact-checking, which need to be cited in order to support information added to our pages. If you have such a reliable, independent source, then you can cite it with the information. Please see Help:Referencing for beginners for the "how-to" - Best wishes - Arjayay (talk) 11:40, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

No idea how to reply, but the reason I did not offer citation is because there isn't one. I have acquired a tape archive from the BBC and I am currently digitising the tapes. One tape is the original BBC reel of the Tom Robinson session. There is not mention of this on the internet that I can find to link to! 81.111.48.17 (talk) 13:20, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

:Hello IP from Durham, sources do not have to be on the internet (dead-tree sources are acceptable), but they do have to be in reliable, independent sources published by a body with a reputation for fact-checking. Furthermore, they must be properly cited, so the information can be verified as true in the future.
If there are no such sources, I'm afraid that you cannot add the statement to the article. Best wishes - Arjayay (talk) 14:50, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

::Then Wikipedia will be the poorer if it is missing important facts. I can't invent a source, I am the source! I'll never trust Wikipedia again if I know it's missing important facts. 81.111.48.17 (talk) 18:16, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

:::Perhaps you shouldn't trust Wikipedia even more, if it was willing to publish unsourced claims? - Arjayay (talk) 18:55, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Arjayay. How are you doing? I hope you are fine. I saw that you removed the source of information at Johnny Sins and gave a valid reason that the source is highly unreliable. So, the information is likely to be removed by someone else since it is unsourced. So, should I add the YouTube short from his official channel? Though I know that would be considered to be promotional. Amogh Tripathi (talk) 14:52, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

:Amogh Tripathi - You've answered your own question, Self published YouTube videos are not reliable, independent sources published by a body with a reputation for fact-checking. - Best wishes - 19:00, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

Arjayay, please don't use vandalism warning templates for non-vandalism issues {{diff2|1292756463|like this}}. Vandalism, as you surely know, has a very specific meaning on Wikipedia. As the policy states: {{tpq|{{strong|Even if misguided, willfully against consensus, or disruptive, any good faith effort to improve the encyclopedia is {{em|not}} vandalism.}}}} Thanks. Daniel Quinlan (talk) 21:23, 28 May 2025 (UTC)