User talk:IsraphelMac

In response to your feedback

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your recent contributions. If you find that you need any help or have questions, you might want to stop by the Teahouse where new users can ask questions to experience editors in a comfortable and non-threatening environment. You also might want to check out the help desk or browse the help pages.

Topher385 (talk) 18:21, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

 

Vancouver Aquarium (March 2013)

Hey IsraphelMac,

What is your definition of constructive?

The facts I posted aren't an opinion, they're truths. Don't young children researching this facility deserve to know both sides of the story from the point of view of the animals that are kept in captivity here? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AshyCrow (talk • contribs) 03:04, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

The edits you made were not written from a Neutral Point of View. (WP:NPOV) Also, if the facts you posted aren't opinions, you should have some sources. (WP:VERIFY) If you do find some, then you should cite them on the article. (WP:CITE) If you don't have any, then it will likely be challenged and removed by another user on Wikipedia. Thanks! :) IsraphelMac (talk) 03:21, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Also, the third edit I made's comment should be NPOV and not vandalism IsraphelMac (talk)

AfC drafts

I just saw that you moved an WP:AFC draft from Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/... to Wikipedia:Articles for creation/... - it's deliberate that the drafts are in the Wikipedia talk namespace because IP editors can create talk pages, but not project pages. Since we like to keep all the drafts in one place, they're all at Wikipedia talk. Yours, Huon (talk) 00:25, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi! Sorry about that, I hadn't known that it was deliberate at the time. I'll be more careful next time. Thanks! IsraphelMac (talk) 03:33, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, IsraphelMac. You have new messages at JMHamo's talk page.
Message added 23:49, 24 November 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

JMHamo (talk) 23:49, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

For being awesome at stopping vandalism!

PureRED (talk) 20:35, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Thank you!! I try my best to stop vandals :P (the Charizard vandalism was just hilarious, too) IsraphelMac (talk) 20:49, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

September 2015

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to Temple of Bel. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.66.250.200 (talk) 18:09, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Hello, according to Wikipedia's policy on reliable sources, the creator and publisher of the work must be reliable. infowars.com is run by Alex Jones, a known conspiracy theorist. Therefore, I cannot be certain that the content is 100% reliable and accurate. Please also read up on Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. IsraphelMac (talk) 18:16, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Inforwars is not run by "Alex Jones" and is a credible source. If you referred to my source, it had multiple links to multiple news agencies such as Press TV. A youtube channel as well with live interviews. Your opinion on who runs what website or who is a conspiracy theorist is irrelevant to the facts and sources provided. Please also stop using multiple accounts under the same IP address to bypass Wiki's policy on edit warring. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.66.250.200 (talk) 18:27, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

If I go to infowars.com, the title of the page is "Alex Jones' Infowars". Then if I scroll down to the bottom of the page, I see a picture of Alex Jones. I cannot find any other sources other than PressTV that is more credible either. "Alex Jones (a conspiracy theorist) runs infowars.com" is not my opinion, but it is a fact. If he is a conspiracy theorist, then it absolutely is relevant to the facts and sources as that undermines his credibility as being a trustworthy source for Wikipedia. I am familiar with the policies of Wikipedia, and I do not use multiple accounts (or IPs) to bypass the policy on edit warring. Those other editors that reverted your edits share the same opinion as me (that it's just a conspiracy theory and has not been confirmed as fact), but we are not the same person. IsraphelMac (talk) 18:43, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

IsraphelMac, these warnings are disruptive and you can ignore them. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 18:44, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, I know. I just wanted to explain to the editor why he/she is getting reverted. Thanks for intervening. IsraphelMac (talk) 18:44, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Idiopathic environmental intolerances dispute

In response to you VANDALISM with allegation Keep it NEUTRAL read first the official Congressional Record

Wikipedia is NOT the source of rumors, bias or propaganda!

It MUST be credible!

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CREC-1998-10-20/html/CREC-1998-10-20-pt1-PgE2244-2.htm] Congressional Record Government Publishing Office / Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 150 (Tuesday, October 20, 1998) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.239.155.158 (talk) 19:15, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

I've requested a block at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Request block of 141.239.155.158. I could do it myself, but it will avoid the usual nuisance abuse-of-power unblock requests if another admin pushes the button. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 19:27, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

...and it looks like it's been done. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 19:28, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. I wasn't really expecting a peaceful resolution (considering the person was resorting to name calling and personal attacks), but was worth a try. IsraphelMac (talk) 19:31, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

Have look on this potential Autobiography

This article seems to be an autobiography, have a look: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siddharth_Sivakumar — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cataclysm991 (talk • contribs) 21:18, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

Hello! I had a quick read and took a look at the primary contributor (Johnkishore), but I couldn't really see any obvious connection between him/her and this "Siddharth Sivakumar". I can't do any more digging than that, otherwise I might become in violation of WP:OUTING. Sorry about that. (Also, why bring this up to me? I'm mostly a random nobody :P) IsraphelMac (talk) 21:46, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

(Johnkishore) mainly edits pages of Siddharth Sivakumar and R Sivakumar (father), and anything associated to R Sivakumar. Further the credibility of the page is suspicious. The person concerned have written around 10 articles in various platforms. Does this mean any journalist can have their own wikipedia page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cataclysm991 (talk • contribs) 22:02, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

Any journalist can't have their page, as per WP:PEOPLE. If the information on the page is supported by the sources (and the sources themselves are compliant to WP:VERIFY), then there isn't really any need to doubt the credibility of the article. Although, I do admit that the user only editing pages related to those two people is a bit suspicious. You may want to get another editor's opinion on this. IsraphelMac (talk) 22:27, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

Yah!! I had asked the right person. Anyway out of 23 sources 8 of them are from websites that the person concerned have created and one is from blogspot. I am confused! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cataclysm991 (talk • contribs) 22:37, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

September 2015

Hello, I'm Randomstuff207 w. Your recent edit appears to have added incorrect information, so I have removed it for now. If you believe the information was correct, please cite a reliable source or discuss your change on the article's talk page. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. R@ndomstuff207 w (talk)

Constant vandalism - America's Next Top Model (cycle 22)

Hi IsraphelMac, another editor (Trafalk09) and I have been undoing persistent vandalism on the ANTM article. One editor that has received several warnings is User:VAJBM. He/she keeps posting results for episodes that have not aired yet. Obviously he isn't providing reliable sources but I wasn't sure if I should mark them as vandalism or not. I would appreciate your taking a look. Thanks, SchoolMarm101 (talk) 18:09, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

@SchoolMarm101: Hello! Yes, the edits by that user can be considered as vandalism as long as they are not in good-faith. You may want to discuss it with the editor on their talk page. If the user ignores or continues adding the information after the discussion, then I would continue on with the warnings. Remember, we should always assume that editors are acting in good-faith unless there's evidence to the contrary or it's blatantly obvious that they're not. (Also, you can link to user pages by typing [[User:VAJBM]], their contributions by typing [[Special:Contributions/VAJBM]], or their talk page by typing [[User talk:VAJBM]].)IsraphelMac (talk) 18:27, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the response. I'll send him another message about vandalism. Meanwhile, there are now 6 edits that need to be reversed as vandalism (by a different user). How do I reverse several edits at once? Thanks. SchoolMarm101 (talk) 21:33, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

@SchoolMarm101: I personally use Twinkle and so do many other editors. It makes common tasks like reverting vandalism and welcoming/warning/reporting users easier as it does most of the work for you. All of Twinkle's tools are under the "TW" menu and the tools available change based on where you are on Wikipedia (articles, talk pages, user talk pages). Also, if you select a diff using the radio boxes on the "view history" page and click "compare selected revisions", you can select revert multiple edits in a row by the same user or choose restore a previous revision. IsraphelMac (talk) 23:00, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

Silento

Dear IsraphelMac, I saw that in the edit you did to Silento, you put in the wrong birthname so I corrected that. R@ndomstuff207 w (talk) 19:31, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

@Randomstuff207 w: It appears there was a misunderstanding, I was reverting the vandalism from the IP user. The incorrect birthname was never reverted when it was introduced in this revision. IsraphelMac (talk) 19:43, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

Ok, now I understand. R@ndomstuff207 w (talk) 19:44, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

Postponed deletion & give me some more time to explore :)

I think my article should not get deleted because its an informative details about that site and company, not for promotion. Even there are so many pages on wiki of company, like flipkart. Those pages also do not show any promotional info like this one. Its just informative details and I'm working on it to get better info about it so that people who search for this company should get to know details and background of this company, which will help them. Hope you give me some more time to make this article better, bcz I know this firm doing so many offline jobs to help people and people should know about their good jobs and ideas. Hope you will give me some more time to explore this firm :) Mrshitiz (talk) 20:10, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

@Mrshitiz: Hi, this is not where you should be opposing the speedy deletion. Please post this on the article's talk page instead so the administrators can see it. IsraphelMac (talk) 20:20, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

Bodufolhudhoo

IsraphelMac, why did you remove the tag marking this page as a Cut and paste move as you did here. It was entirely correct. The original is here. The page 'move' could have been fixed easily, not so easy now as the page has been moved again to another title. 220 of ^Borg 03:31, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

Im typing this on my phone, so apologies for any spelling or grammar mistakes as autocorrect seems to be disabled on the Wikipedia app. At the time, if i remember correctly, the page was at "Bodufulhadhoo (Alif Alif Atoll)", and the tag was linking to "Bodufulhadhoo (Alif Alif Atoll)". I thought "that can't be right," so I removed it. I dont believe I did anything wrong here. IsraphelMac (talk) 03:56, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

The tag was correct. The difference in name is very easy to miss "Boduf[u]lh[a]dhoo" & "Boduf[o]lh[u]dhoo". If you had clicked on the Bodufulhadhoo (Alif Alif Atoll) link then it would have taken you to the that page, but redirected to the cut and pasted (and then moved [1]) version at Bodufolhudhoo. The tag also says:

"If the bot has made an error or the content is properly attributed: Simply note so on the this article's discussion page and remove the tag."

You at least could have said something like "Coren bot in error", but you gave no reason for removing the tag, as the above text prompts you to do. You have simply removed a tag that should have stayed. 220 of ^Borg 04:40, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

I admit that I did make an error now rhat I've had a closer look. However, I feel that you are being overly hostile towards me just for making a simple mistake and not including some text in my edit summary. IsraphelMac (talk) 20:45, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

Your user page

Do you want it indefinitely semi-protected? --NeilN ^{talk to me} 20:38, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

This might sound a bit insane, but no! I normally patrol recent changes from IPs, so they can't vandalize my userpage if it's semi protected. (Gotta get that counter as high as I can get it) If I change my mind in the future, I'll open up a request. Thanks for the offer! IsraphelMac (talk) 20:44, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Extreme Rules 2015

Hi

I made that page on accident. I apologize. However, I like how you called it "inappropriate." You do realize there are pages about the word "fuck" and breasts right? Thatwweguy 619 (talk) 02:38, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello, apology accepted. I did not call the page inappropriate, I called it vandalism. Additionally, the contents of the article on breasts and the word "fuck" are vastly different to a page that simply says "fuck you". IsraphelMac (talk) 02:49, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:54, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, IsraphelMac. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, IsraphelMac. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Rollback granted

Hi IsraphelMac. After reviewing your request for "rollbacker", I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:

• Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
• Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
• Rollback should never be used to edit war.
• If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
• Use common sense.

If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:Administrators' guide/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! Beeblebrox (talk) 22:11, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:15, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:34, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:08, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:41, 28 November 2023 (UTC)