Hello, I'm Materialscientist. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Film Heritage Foundation, but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source 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. Thanks. Materialscientist (talk) 06:46, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

But i added resources please check. Filmyy (talk) 06:47, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or significantly change content without citing verifiable and reliable sources, as you did with this edit to Film Heritage Foundation. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Materialscientist (talk) 07:04, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

why? i have added the content that is very well cited. What is the problem with this? why you do not want to add, just because i am new on Wikipedia. Filmyy (talk) 07:06, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please specify which resource is not reliable. Filmyy (talk) 07:07, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Paradha (2025 film) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paradha. When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discussion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. S0091 (talk) 18:13, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Paradha is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paradha (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

DonaldD23 talk to me 01:22, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The article Raju Gari Ammayi Naidu Gari Abbayi has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Appears to fail WP:NFILM

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. DonaldD23 talk to me 21:45, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

hello@Filmyy. need recommendations to improve article Ahmed Osman Shatila Saria116 (talk) 10:27, 28 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that several pieces of factual and verifiable information added to the SPJIMR Wikipedia page were removed by User:Filmyy. I would like to request clarification regarding these removals.

All the information we added was supported by reliable, published, third-party news sources, and each point included citations to valid articles. Since Wikipedia requires content to be verifiable, neutral, and sourced, we ensured that every statement met those criteria.

Therefore, I kindly request User:Filmyy (or any reviewing editor) to please reconsider the deletions or specify which policies the removed content was violating. If there were concerns about formatting or citation style, we are happy to correct them instead of having the information deleted entirely.

Our only intention is to keep the SPJIMR page updated, accurate, and aligned with reliable sources.

Thank you. Kaushik from SPJIMR (talk) 10:44, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It seems like you are blocked due to your COI with SPJIMR. I suggest you to follow the suggestions given by other editors on your talk page. Filmyy (talk) 11:00, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

---

Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

---

Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 22:45, 20 December 2025 (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).

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

---

Request reason:

I do not agree with this block. Could you please provide the link to the sockpuppet investigation? I would like to understand how I am being connected to other accounts, as I operate only one Wikipedia account. This appears to be a mistake. Previously, I was incorrectly associated with User:Thewikizoomer, an anonymous IP address that attempted to link me to User:Thewikizoomer. You may review that case for reference (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Thewikizoomer/Archive). Please do not link me to other Wikipedia accounts without clear and appropriate evidences. If there are concerns regarding any AfD discussions in which I am involved, please let me know so I can address them directly. I affirm that I am not connected to any other Wikipedia accounts. Additionally, I do not believe my contributions contain promotional or advertising content. If any of my edits were made in error, please point them out and I will make the necessary improvements. Overall, I believe this block has been applied in error, as I am not the individual being sought in this matter.

Decline reason:

Your editing pattern is simply too close to that of KDBalab and Lord Johnson24 for this to be a coincidence, in my opinion and having reviewed ticket:2025122010002006. Yamla (talk) 11:43, 21 December 2025 (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.