User talk:ISTB351

Mafiapedia123

Hello,
can you please return to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mafiapedia123 and provide further diffs as to why you are convinced the two accounts and the IP are used by the same person, and why that use is to be considered WP:ILLEGIT?
Thanks, Amalthea 13:41, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Further evidence added here. Clearly illegitimate as edits to same topic without declaration of identity. ISTB351 (talk) (contributions) 13:59, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

A brownie for you!

Thanks on the revert of my talk page! Allens (talk | contribs) 20:22, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

No problem! ISTB351 (talk) (contributions) 22:19, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Removing unsourced material

Hi, in this recent edit you removed material from a page for being unsourced. In this particular case, the information that had been added (albeit without sources) is true. Even if that wasn't the case, the information falls into the "doubtful but not harmful" category - so should be tagged, not removed, according to WP:NOCITE. I know how easy it is to get carried away with Huggle but please do be careful; it's far better to tag unharmful unsourced material, and possibly discuss on the article's talk page, than remove it unless it's in a BLP. Thanks, waggers (talk) 10:41, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

I take your advice on board. It must however remain the responsibility of the editor adding the material to provide sources for additions of material even if not harmful. A level 1 warning for addition of unsourced content gives them ample opportunity to do so. ISTB351 (talk) (contributions) 11:16, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

I would like to add my concern about this user editing in a similar way on the wadham college page. Just because something is not referenced or is not referenced correctly it should not be removed. It should be flagged and given a chance to be referenced correctly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.67.116.180 (talk) 16:10, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Syria

This discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Please highlight my "personal commentary". Saudi Arabia and Qatar are supporting the notion of freedom in Syria, whilst they themselves are dictator regimes. Intervention in Libya has not been beneficial as the rebels do not know how to run a country. This is not 'disruptive editing'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nirvana101 (talk • contribs) 14:04, 21 March 2012 (UTC) Your edit at this talk page is indeed another example of a failure to comply with WP:NPOV. Please read that policy carefully, and WP:OR, before adding material to Syria. Thank you nevertheless for your contributions. ISTB351 (talk) (contributions) 14:09, 21 March 2012 (UTC) I disagree that I am violating any policies. Thank you for your smug remarks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nirvana101 (talk • contribs) 14:21, 21 March 2012 (UTC) Please also read WP:NPA, before accusing another editor of being "smug" in the future. ISTB351 (talk) (contributions) 14:24, 21 March 2012 (UTC) From that article, "Comment on content, not on the contributor" by applying this to "Thank you nevertheless for your contributions" we can see that I said "smug" in relation to your comment, and not you as a person. What good are contributions if they are removed? Seeing as you are an editor with objectivity heavily embedded into your character as per the rules of Wikipedia, perhaps you could edit my postings in accordance with the fancy bureaucratic rules here at Wikipedia. Or link me to another rule outlining supposed violations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nirvana101 (talk • contribs) 14:36, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for joining the Crusade!

	Crusader Cross
	Thank you for assisting the Crusade against vandals, hoaxers and other infidels. Trumpkinius (talk) 17:44, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Please edit responsibly. I'm sure that this message is indeed well intentioned. Other editors might well take a dimmer view. ISTB351 (talk) (contributions) 19:13, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Symphony No. 5 (Beethoven)

I have provided 3 reliable sources for my addition to this article. Please apologize on my talk page for your knee-jerk overreaction to my edit. 75.2.208.92 (talk) 02:30, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Replied at IP talk page. ISTB351 (talk) (contributions) 02:43, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

OK. Please be sure not to revert edits in the future on topics you know nothing about. 75.2.208.92 (talk) 02:44, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

It is policy that we provide sources when adding content to the encyclopedia. In your edit which I reverted you made no attempt to do so, and the edit appeared to be vandalism. After you provided sources, I apologised at your talk page and pointed you in the direction of Wikipedia policies for future reference. I should also now point you to the policy prohibiting personal attacks against other users, given your latest outburst. ISTB351 (talk) (contributions) 02:50, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Troubles

It is clearly stated in the CAIN report and on other wikipedia pages that the INLA & IPLO had feud. It is also stated in the CAIN report and wikipedia that the Provisional IRA ended the IPLO. This shouldnt be an issue.