User talk:Israell

Welcome!

Hello, Israell, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Hyacinth 20:16, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits to Courtney Love

Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia, Israell! However, your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove spam from Wikipedia. If you were trying to insert a good link, please accept my creator's apologies, and try to reinsert the link again. If your link was genuine spam, please note that inserting spam into Wikipedia is against policy. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! Shadowbot 06:34, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:68.82.82.248

Regretably I do not know who you go about having someone blocked, but I agree that this user does need to be. All I can suggest is that you contact as Administrator, they will know how to. --Berks105 18:59, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Raise it at Wikipedia:Administrator_intervention_against_vandalism (WP:AIV) if they are vandalising a page and have received warnings about it. Orderinchaos78 10:49, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Shania Twain

I agree that she is also known as Eilleen Lange, however, the infobox asks for an alias. An alias is the name most likely to be known as. In this case, it's Shania Twain. --Renrenren 03:01, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Madonna lyrics

First of all, it's not at all clear what point those lyrics are illustrating. Are they supposed to seem particularly insipid? They don't, to me. Moreover, we can't have links to lyric sites that violate artists' copyright, as the site in question seems to, by its own admission. Better to quote more actual reviews. -GTBacchus^(talk) 18:49, 6 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ANI

Hi, please note that WP:ANI is not the place for vandalism reports unless it's widespread across a variety of articles (i.e., a concentrated vandalism attack). Normal vandal reports go to WP:AIV. – Ch acor 11:03, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your query on Michael Jackson

Can't help you on the question you'd left on my talk page. My sole interest in that page was reverting the vandalism done by 216.11.148.3. If you've got good sourced info, Be Bold and update the article! -- GJD 16:21, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Jackson

Hi, I don't know the answer to your question, but I've moved the comment to the Michael Jackson talk page where someone should respond eventually. Cheers; JACOPLANE • 2007-01-11 05:08

Please be more careful

Hey, when you were editing WP:RFP you removed my President of the United States request and replaced it with your Madonna request. When editing, please use the "Show Changes" button below the textbox to confirm that you have not removed any important content from an article. Thank you. --Aervanath 15:39, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Queen of Pop" pseudo-title

I still have a problem with the title being included at all. It is not widely used -- certainly not within the mainstream media. If anything, it is more fancruft, and as such, does not belong in a Wikipedia entry. I'll leave it for now; I'm about to be away for a family emergency. But this is something that truly needs to be excised. --Mhking 12:22, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

'Queen Of Pop' is widely used by the media and fans alike. Nobody else in the muscic industry is 'Queen Of Pop'. Britney Spears is sometimes called 'Princess Of Pop', and Courtney Love 'Queen Of Rock', but they are differentb titles. Queen Of Pop is fine as it is. 80.43.9.157 13:12, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Prince and Blanket

Oooo....I honestly don't know. Were you asking for a specific reason or did you just want to know out of curiosity?UberCryxic 02:38, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I'm not sure about the whole name thing. The KOP label is prominently in the lead now because of the consensus reached in another section of the talk page, not because of the vote. That vote was invalid from the start. Normally it's best to gain consensus on an issue, and if that fails after excessive efforts, then you can go ahead and start polling.UberCryxic 04:06, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Madonna (entertainer)

~~Do not remove the relevant table. It is vandalism and you will be blocked from WP. Vikrant 07:35, 19 December 2007 (UTC)~~[reply]

Sorry I sent this warning to the wrong person. Vikrant 08:12, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Replacing one reliable source by another is an edit war and a waste of time. Try avoiding this and instead replace fansites etc. Vikrant 11:51, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you, but the main editor has disregarded everything I've said at this point as trivial, so the article is no longer of any interest to me. Madonna's biography could be a lot more comprehensive than what it is now. It would be best to voice your concern at the article's GAR. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 02:27, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll check out the expansions you suggested as the GAR is likely to be in favour of them (as it was in case of marriage and children). But note meanwhile WP is not censored. Content may offend anyone, so our sole purpose is to make sure that it doesn't generate bias by the words being used. Ultra! 07:22, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You still don't get this? The GAR would have got the article out without what I added (and summarised) in lead. Removing the line on the church as it offended somebody is not acceptable at all. Ultra! 08:13, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]