 Please feel free to drop me a message! |
Again?
All the best, Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 03:46, 3 September 2025 (UTC)
Feedback request: Maths, science, and technology request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard on a "Maths, science, and technology" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
(trialing replacing Yapperbot) SodiumBot (botop|talk) 06:30, 3 September 2025 (UTC)
Meir Ettinger
Hey, I’d like to ask you if you could please take a look at the Meir Ettinger page. I saw you also edited there a bit. There were recently two IP edits that I think make no sense. I would revert them myself, but I am still not EC and am still dealing with fallout over this whenever I make even the mildest contribution protecting Israel-related pages from IP vandals. Slomo666 (talk) 21:11, 5 October 2025 (UTC)
- Hi Slomo666, thank you for asking. I have taken a look at the edits. The first one was very obvious, because it was not confirmed by the source. However, this text: "Ettinger has called for the demolition of what he and his associates deem ”secular” state of Israel and State of Palestine" versus "Ettinger has called for the demolition of the secular state of Israel and state of Palestine" - I don't know enough about this to be able to judge that edit. Friendly, Lova Falk (talk) 07:44, 6 October 2025 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
 |
The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar |
| Crazy times apparently leads to a crazy Wikipedia, and there are not nearly enough editors taking an active stance against those who attempt to misuse it to promote disinformation, fringe ideas, and censor information, be it in subtle or direct ways.
From what I have seen, you seem to be trying your best to maintain the integrity of this website, even though it is an often difficult and thankless task, and for that I think you deserve a barnstar. :) TylerBurden (talk) 16:46, 8 October 2025 (UTC) |
Emotionally focused therapy
Hello! Our article about Emotionally focused therapy is in need of some TLC. Would you be so kind to take a look? Polygnotus (talk) 21:28, 18 October 2025 (UTC)
- I am sorry Polygnotus, but as a psychologist my main focus has always been assessment of children and adolescents, and not therapy. Furthermore, I stopped working eight years ago, and I am out of touch with psychology. I have taken a look, but I would need to dig down deeply into this, and I don't feel motivated to do so. Friendly, Lova Falk (talk) 06:53, 19 October 2025 (UTC)
Looking at your recent contribs, due to our open model Wikipedia will always be a battleground for such topics. It is best to avoid that stuff. Polygnotus (talk) 21:29, 18 October 2025 (UTC)
- I feel for ip-editors who comment in good faith on the Talk page, only to see their comments either ignored or immediately deleted. I try to answer them, and it happens that I revert a delete. But in this case, deleting was correct. Lova Falk (talk) 06:53, 19 October 2025 (UTC)
- The further you get away from anything even remotely related to I/P and Trump, the more fun Wikipedia is. I think Wikipedians should form groups of people who outsource on-wiki disputes to eachother. Polygnotus (talk) 08:26, 19 October 2025 (UTC)
- Polygnotus I find the most interesting parts of Wikipedia to be those where it is not an encyclopedia but serves as a living document of contemporary history. And it is so good that we all have our favourite parts, that makes for a very rich collective project! Lova Falk (talk) 08:45, 19 October 2025 (UTC)
- Just like real life, the most interesting parts of Wikipedia are often not the most fun.
Polygnotus (talk) 08:49, 19 October 2025 (UTC)
- Polygnotus, actually, honestly, for me it can be. I remember 13 June when Israel had bombed Iran. Without editing Wikipedia, I would have been distressed, but instead I worked best as I could on the article about those strikes, reading online outlets and thinking, is there something in here that I can add to the article. I remember this as a really good Wikipedia day. Lova Falk (talk) 08:58, 19 October 2025 (UTC)
- Just like real life, the most interesting parts of Wikipedia are often not the most fun.
- The issue is that people like me no longer donate to Wikipedia BECAUSE there is so much WP:GAME. And it is very obvious that just as there was an era of young music fans engaging in passionate edit wars to the point of vandalism; there is now an era of well-meaning socialism that is polluting the encyclopaedic quality of any pages that have a political lean. That is really disappointing. The lede on the page about Hamas cannot be described as well written and edited. It is very much Hamas propaganda. A number of long term editors were banned about a year ago when their strategies were carefully documented; but they seem to have polluted the well very successfully over three decades with many young people believing that Pappe, Finkelstein and Chomsky are subject experts and anyone who contradicts their claims is Hasbara. That’s not the case. I wish well meaning young people would read important background information like the Explanatory Memorandum (US Government Exhibit 003-0085 3:04-CR-240-G in U.S. v Holy Land Foundation, et al.) and documentation which shows the amount of hostility these terrorist organisations have toward westerners; but they don’t. So they see them as allies, and they get happy clappy about the red/green alliance; making light of communism, and having no idea how that alliance goes for the Marxists. Is there a page on Dalia Ziada? Maybe if they read her book they would understand that this is not some empathy kitten patting parade. This is existential, and they keep shooting own goals. ~2025-38877-20 (talk) 08:00, 7 December 2025 (UTC)
- Hi! I don't know why you write this to me. I don't know anything about the banned long term editors, I haven't worked with the lead of Hamas, I just try to do my part in making sure that good information is available for those who can access the English Wikipedia. Presently, I have worked with articles concerning refugees in Central Africa. Lova Falk (talk) 08:09, 7 December 2025 (UTC)
- Polygnotus I find the most interesting parts of Wikipedia to be those where it is not an encyclopedia but serves as a living document of contemporary history. And it is so good that we all have our favourite parts, that makes for a very rich collective project! Lova Falk (talk) 08:45, 19 October 2025 (UTC)
- The further you get away from anything even remotely related to I/P and Trump, the more fun Wikipedia is. I think Wikipedians should form groups of people who outsource on-wiki disputes to eachother. Polygnotus (talk) 08:26, 19 October 2025 (UTC)
Extended Protection Edit Requests
Hello Lova,
Thank you for the ECP edit at Naduvazhi. I have made ECP requests at a few other pages, all of them with slight changes to the grammar, line spacing, hyperlinking, formatting and neutrality. Please have a look, if possible. Thank you very much, Lova. Taliparamba (talk) 08:42, 22 October 2025 (UTC)
- You are welcome Taliparamba! I will take a look shortly. Lova Falk (talk) 08:46, 22 October 2025 (UTC)
- I have done a couple of them, but I'll leave Kiryathil Nair to another editor. Lova Falk (talk) 09:27, 22 October 2025 (UTC)
Recent Edit
Recent edit at Ezhava , Hi Lova, I have moved the recent addition into the lead to the pre existing subsection "variations" , Earlier similar discussions seemed to be moved to that subsect as majority of the discussions were about the classifications and disputes in the lead, which seemed to be mentioned already in the article. The lead was looking very much povish. Miamiller777 (talk) 11:45, 22 October 2025 (UTC)
- Miamiller777 Well done 👍 Lova Falk (talk) 14:38, 22 October 2025 (UTC)
Edit requests on WP:GS/CASTE topics
Hi there, I see that you approved an edit request on Talk:Jenmi. One of the reasons that this topic-area is ECR is that many contributions to it look superficially like good changes, because to people who aren't "in the know" they appear to be well-sourced, but they're actually sourced to really dubious old publications. There's some information about this at WP:RAJ. Thanks for the help! -- asilvering (talk) 00:18, 24 October 2025 (UTC)
- Hi asilvering, thank you for telling me, and please revert my edits if they are somehow not good! Lova Falk (talk) 03:27, 24 October 2025 (UTC)
- No need to worry, in the case of that edit request, the only thing they were changing was a wikilink, if I recall correctly. I just wanted to make sure you were aware of this if you were going to be doing any more CT/SA-related edit requests. Cheers. -- asilvering (talk) 03:35, 24 October 2025 (UTC)
Hero of Wikipedia
 |
Hero of Wikipedia |
| For protecting Wikipedia from false information and cooperating with small editors to make Wikipedia a greater online encyclopedia Helloitzmeleo (talk) 16:25, 29 October 2025 (UTC) |
- btw don't take the hammer and sickle seriously. i just choose it because it looks kinda cool.I am not a communist Helloitzmeleo (talk) 16:28, 29 October 2025 (UTC)
- Thank you so much Helloitzmeleo. Heartwarming, very much appreciated! Lova Falk (talk) 16:39, 29 October 2025 (UTC)
Regarding my edits that were undid
Since you undid my edits on Ukrainian refugee crisis, you removed the links in the see also section because they were unrelated. But I saw on other pages related to refugee crises like Vietnamese boat people has a link to Afghan refugees in the See also section, and Venezuelan refugee crisis has a link to Refugees of the Syrian Civil War in the See also section. I have a couple questions: Why do you want the See also section to be related to Ukraine and why did you still keep Evacuations during the 2023 Israel–Hamas war in the See also section when it's not related to Ukraine? DiscoveringMysteries03 (talk) 21:36, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
- Hi DiscoveringMysteries03! Thank you for your message. See also links should be relevant to the article, and not a list of possible things you can associate with. There are so many refugee crises in the world; we cannot in every article about one particular refugee crisis have See also links to every other refugee crisis we can think of. The reason I kept Evacuations during the 2023 Israel–Hamas war is because I checked that article and it was written: "Some of the apartments that were donated to evacuated civilians had been initially earmarked for Ukrainian refugees fleeing the Russian invasion of Ukraine, but were later repurposed.[2]" So there was a connection with Ukraine and therefore I kept it. But maybe the connection is not strong enough. About See also links I did not remove in other articles, I guess simply that I overlooked the Afghan refugees in the Vietnamese boat people, but then I got tired of it and did something else. Lova Falk (talk) 07:46, 12 November 2025 (UTC)
- But if you feel very strongly about this, please feel free to put them back in, I won't revert it again. Lova Falk (talk) 07:48, 12 November 2025 (UTC)
ArbCom 2025 Elections voter message
Hello! Voting in the 2025 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 1 December 2025. 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 2025 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) 00:30, 18 November 2025 (UTC)
Feedback request: Maths, science, and technology request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Talk:The Age of Disclosure on a "Maths, science, and technology" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
(replacing Yapperbot) SodiumBot (botop|talk) 20:42, 30 November 2025 (UTC)
Revert
Recently you have reverted my changes on Anti-Russian sentiment. I tried to make page's description shorter and more inline with the layout, by making it more neutral and deleting some overcitation. Please specify the reason for revert. Gigman (talk) 15:32, 6 December 2025 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
 |
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | |
| This is for your contributions related to the Gaza war. Pachu Kannan (talk) 10:55, 16 December 2025 (UTC) |
Thank you Pachu Kannan! How nice and unexpected! ☺️ Lova Falk (talk) 11:01, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
Proposed deletion of Refugees of Uganda
The article Refugees of Uganda has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
This "article" was previously an incorrect redirect to Refugees in Uganda, leading to an article describing the refugees that come to Uganda. However, Wikipedia articles called "Refugees of ..." describe the refugees that come from a certain country. We do not have article describing refugees from Uganda. Therefore this should be deleted. I removed the redirect only to find that the article still was there - my mistake.
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, articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion based on established criteria.
If the proposed deletion has already been carried out, you may request undeletion of the article at any time.
This is an automated notification. Please refer to the page's history for further information. DatBot (talk) 00:31, 26 December 2025 (UTC)
Repeated image removal by multi-account user
Hi, on the page 'Abzakhs', a user (actually 2 different accounts with same person, Jaxfob and ~2025-42243-97) is constantly deleting an image from the infobox. The opposing account is repeatedly removing the image of tamga's from the infobox, and using multiple accounts, and justifying the deletions by claiming 'insufficient resources'. This claim is incorrect, as the Wikimedia file page of the image already contains clear and verifiable citations yet the removals continue despite this being clearly documented. Also these accounts has no editing history, he is just here for deleting the image.
I am not sure who to contact so if this is not the right place, could you please direct me to a different user that could resolve the issue? Thanks. Liptink0 (talk) 15:20, 27 December 2025 (UTC)
- Hi Liptink0! The first thing you can do is to invite the editor to discuss this with you on the talk page. Jaxfob wrote a long edit summary and thus doesn't seem to be someone who aims to vandalise the article - instead they disagree with you. You can ping other editors who have worked with Abzakhs to participate in the discussion. Friendly, 17:53, 27 December 2025 (UTC)Lova Falk (talk)
- We have discussed the issue in Turkish Wikipedia. He has lesser experience in history and trying to remove the image just because he can't properly understand the sources and also said if I'm giving a historical info, I must indicate this. However I already indicated in my recent changes with writing 'historical...'. Also he still didn't answer back my latest reply, it's been 10 days, but still removing the image. First and second sources are for the images of symbols, third and fourth one are for the names of the families that were historically aristocrat. Also I know the other editors that worked in this page and they are unavaliable in Wikipedia unfortunately. Thanks. Liptink0 (talk) 23:42, 27 December 2025 (UTC)
Thanks
...for removing content I added to the Iran/UK article, moved out of another article where it definitely wasn't due. I had doubts it was due here either so good that you spotted it. BobFromBrockley (talk) 12:04, 10 January 2026 (UTC)
- Hi BobFromBrockley, such a nice reaction, thank you! I am always hesitant to delete good faith edits, I don't want to hurt people who put work in their edits, but I do it anyway when I think they are not due. Thank you for responding in this way!
Lova Falk (talk) 13:47, 10 January 2026 (UTC)
