User talk:Zzuuzz/Archive 5

Revert Warning
Did you also warn G2bambino to ALSO stop engaging in the revert war? Magonaritus 20:53, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes. -- zzuuzz(talk) 20:53, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I'm aware of 3RR and my encroachment on it. However, could you explain what should be done when an editor is completely ignoring the recommendation by a third opinion moderator, on top of editing in bad faith and to make a point, and no longer engages in discussion on the Talk page? --G2bambino 20:59, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I gave my comments back on the Talk page. Magonaritus 21:38, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Norwich school renaming...
Ah - apologies - the title change was I thought necessary and well overdue, since the title broke wikipedia guidelines, but you are quite correct that I appear to have gone about it the wrong way. I've amended some of the content on the page, so I'd rather it wasn't just undone, but moved back by hand. I could do that, if you'd prefer and then we could go about moving it the correct way? There's basically another related problem in that there are currently poorly titled pages for Norwich school, Norwich School and Norwich School (educational institution) and for the school of art and design. I thought they should be sorted out and was endeavouring to start that process. I shall add this to your talk page too... Tom Coates 14:13, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Protect
Hi, you deleted the page Fran Timbers, wel the creator has said that it is an attack page been created against him, whether this is true or not it has been recreted many times in the last few days so could you please create it and the protect it from recreation please. Thanks, its been a bit of edit warrning on these articles previously. Cheers and happy editing!! Telly addict  15:12, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I noticed that most socks today have been trying to delete the article. I am keeping an eye on it for the moment, with the salt to hand. BTW, you might want to check out what links to the article. -- zzuuzz(talk) 15:13, 4 March 2007 (UTC)


 * This has been a bit of a problem recently, if its recreated again coudl you protect it as I'm discussing the problem with other users, the creator is asking me to help him - its hard work - I'm experienced but this DB removal tags of articles and stuff is tiring!! Thanks aain. Telly addict  15:16, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Gwersyllt railway station
Gwersyllt railway station is the resident railway station of MIT. Hence, I am redirecting it to MIT Heywool 01:43, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Dingodile
Thanks for protecting Dingodile... although it sure was enjoyable reading the back-and-forth arguing edit summaries in the article history over the past couple of months :-)  Thomas Dzubin  Talk 18:25, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
 * :-) I was getting rather bored of them. -- zzuuzz(talk) 18:27, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Block of 209.50.153.170
I discovered, after doing some rDNS, that it's registered to a school district. Should I unblock/reblock to allow account creation, or do you want to? Veinor (talk to me) 18:22, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks I was going to return to it later. I am tempted to apply a long anon only schoolblock with account creation disabled. The previous edit history of that address does not bode well for future accounts created from it. -- zzuuzz(talk) 18:52, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

User:Australia03
Hey there,

I just noticed that a user you blocked removed the block and all comments from their talk page (User_talk:Australia03). Not sure if that matters or not, just thought I'd let you know. --Searles2sels (PJ) 20:41, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks. -- zzuuzz(talk) 22:06, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Keeping it real
user:Keep it Real has openly expressed his desire to destroy Kyanka's life, business, and reputation; he has also openly threatened Kyanka's daughter. I doubt he'd ever actually harm the child, though. DS 03:30, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Sock-Reincarnation of linkspammer you perma-blocked
I appears blocked spammer has returned as  - same links, same articles. Can you deal with this or should I post to AIV or ANI? Thanks!  Kathryn NicDhàna  ♫ ♦ ♫ 20:55, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

You don't seem to be online at the moment, so I'll post to ANI :-) ~  Kathryn NicDhàna  ♫ ♦ ♫ 21:08, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!
Not sure if its entirely appropriate (as I'm not one hundred percent reading through the help files yet) but I'd just like to thank you for being helpful with my introduction to wikipedia. Keep up the good work!

Removal of autoblock
I removed an autoblock on 60.234.48.118 resulting from your block of user:MightyWarriors. The block was affecting the editing of User:Ncox, who I know to be a good user. See the history of User talk:Ncox if required.- gadfium 01:23, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I agree. It's a small world, init. -- zzuuzz(talk) 01:48, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

My RfA
Hi Zzuuzz. Thank you for your vote of support, and for taking care of my RfA during the week. Rest assured that I heard every voice loud and clear during the discussion, and will strive to use the mop carefully and responsibly. Thanks for your support, and please don't hesitate to give me constructive criticism anytime. Xiner (talk, email) 02:02, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks
thanks for removing vandalisum from my page I only just noitceed it on my watchlist ♥Eternal Pink-Ready to fight for love and grace♥ 18:06, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks agian I was about to revert it but your to fast for me :} you'r not human ^...^ ♥Eternal Pink-Ready to fight for love and grace♥ 18:27, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

sprotect
I don't know any other way other than sprotect to disable editing by unregistered users to protect an article that is being repeatedly vandalized by someone from an anonymous IP. How can I protect an article? -Mike Payne 15:36, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Hi Mike. Protection can only be performed by admins, and there is a page to request protection at, Requests for page protection (shortcut: WP:RPP). However in this case, rather than the dramatic step of protecting the page, I am just about to block the school vandal responsible. -- zzuuzz(talk) 15:38, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Actually, User:Netsnipe beat me to the block. They have been blocked for 6 months. -- zzuuzz(talk) 15:40, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
 * They can't have been blocked for 6 months, they were undoing my edits this morning... If you look on their contribs page it has entries from 3/16. -Mike Payne 15:44, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
 * And what is sprotection intended for? Only featured articles? -Mike Payne 15:48, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
 * They were blocked for 6 months, just after my first reply above . Semi-protection is used for any heavily vandalised pages. The policy is at WP:PPOL. To get a rough idea of what constitutes heavy vandalism, see WP:RFPP. In most cases it is preferable to block the vandals rather than exclude all unregistered editors. -- zzuuzz(talk) 16:04, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
 * True... I'm just not an admin and can't block people myself, and it sucks to have to wait while their IP is on the request list and their doing more damage in the meantime. -Mike Payne 16:57, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

My User Page
Thank you for reverting the vandalism, I doubt i'd have noticed if i hadn't seen it on recent changes. Cheers mate, Jonomacdrones 17:31, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

7chan page.
Anonymous demands, that you bring back the 7chan page, and further more state your reasoning for deleting the page! Lulzicon 17:32, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Who? The page was deleted because it did not assert any notability (CSD A7). It only included a very short sentence, and you have given no other indication of its importance. -- zzuuzz(talk) 17:35, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Selenite page
Thanks zzuzz for both your welcome and your help - I've fixed my errors - and I'll keep trying to remember to fill in the edit summaries - I have senior moments sometimes. Ashley.AshleyWitchcrafter 20:40, 16 March 2007 (UTC)


 * No problem, I think it could still do with some work (wikification), I'll see if I can help out with it later. -- zzuuzz(talk) 20:44, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi, again, zzuuzz, I've done some more work on the selenite article - thank you for your formatting changes - was both unsure and reluctant to do those - so thank you also for teaching me by example. Hopefully, the article is now better. AshleyAshleyWitchcrafter 17:07, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Kaziranga National Park
Hi, you have reverted the correct Assamese spelling and name to the wrong one, in your latest edit. Please revert your edits. Thanks. Chaipau 01:15, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Hi. I made a simple revert to remove the huge helpme request in the page. Please revert it yourself to the correct version. Thanks. -- zzuuzz(talk) 01:16, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Takaja
SOrry —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Takaja (talk • contribs) 01:22, 19 March 2007 (UTC).

User:Evill666
Thanks for blocking this user, he/she made some page move vandalism, could you check into it? (edit: Oh! You've alreday done it! Thanks again!) - Myanw 14:17, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Smile!


has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing! Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Saber girl08 16:47, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

not sprotected
Hi Zzuuzz, why is it that when I sprotected uranium IP address' where still able to vandalise. I though it would help prevent vandalism. Also, why did you removed the sprotect? --CyclePat 20:37, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Okay! Never mind. I checked out and it says it all. Thank you. --CyclePat 20:40, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Why?
Why?That is not vandalize.--Ajihfiuehwu hghiriu bnlsjlu 13:30, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
 * It's not really a helpful picture is it? -- zzuuzz(talk) 13:54, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Why deletion??
Hi, why is the picture deleted from the article Kori Rotti? do u have any valid reason for doing so??? Abushahin 12:56, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Hi. I removed the link from the article because the image was deleted. As explained on your talk page, there was no copyright tag (CSD I4). -- zzuuzz(talk) 13:14, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Unblocking of Userpage
You mentioned how I can request un-protecting my userpage, and I was wondering when a good time to do that is. Thanks much in advance. Chickyfuzz14(user talk) 04:02, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Good question. There are two answers really: when you want; or when the vandalism stops. If you are on wikibreak, think about it when you return, otherwise, you might want to give it a few weeks. More vagueness can be found at the policy and its talk page, but let me know if I can help further. -- zzuuzz(talk) 11:44, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Brock Lesnar
Hi, can you atleast reduce the protection to semi? Im sure you dont know anything about that individual but that is why i put up a source. There is no admin who knows anything about that individual so can you atleast make it semi? Maybe there is an established user knows about that individual and may update it as i prooved is needed with that particular source i explained with. Jamal
 * It is not being unprotected even to semi because of the numerous sockpuppets. Any proposed edits should be explained on the article's talk page, and consensus achieved from other regular editors, before asking for an edit request to a protected page. -- zzuuzz(talk) 15:36, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Oh ok i did not realise it was beacuse of sockpuppetery. I guess it is better to wait until things have calmed down then. Jamal


 * Yeah, nice try. Jamal89 is yet another abusive sockpuppet of banned editor, .  --Yamla 17:17, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of The Search Agency
An article that you have been involved in editing, The Search Agency, has been listed by me for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/The Search Agency. Thank you. --A. B. (talk) 22:02, 24 March 2007 (UTC)


 * P.S. Thanks for all your spam-fighting working on various articles! --A. B. (talk)

IP talk page
Hi you have accused me of vandlesing a page ??? i do not know why you think this i understand 1 perosn can have more than 1 Ip address. please would kindly withdraw that accusation !!

northampton uK —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 212.1.143.233 (talk • contribs).


 * Hello, yes it appears you may have a shared IP address. A previous user of that address chose to vandalise Wikipedia, as can be seen in the contributions. If you have not been vandalising, please ignore the message. -- zzuuzz(talk) 23:08, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

WPATT protection notices
Re: User talk:SMcCandlish - Done! Wikipedia talk:Verifiability and Wikipedia talk:No original research (the template code itself is at Verifiability/Header. How much discussion time should this have? &mdash;  SMcCandlish &#91;talk&#93; &#91;contrib&#93; ツ 00:50, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
 * FYI, I'm being attacked for doing this by one of "the usual suspects", at Wikipedia talk:No original research. &mdash; SMcCandlish &#91;talk&#93; &#91;contrib&#93; ツ 19:13, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Further update: WP:RS version now exists, because the tag presently installed at RS drew some criticism; see Wikipedia talk:Reliable sources &mdash; SMcCandlish &#91;talk&#93; &#91;contrib&#93; ツ 19:36, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

The coveted Spamstar of Glory
Thanks for all you do to keep the spam down. --A. B. (talk) 01:49, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks! -- zzuuzz(talk) 01:09, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!
Thanks for helping with the Runtshit-sock! I just wondered; when you label, say User:Rancefilth, you use a different template than me, (the cat:Wikipedia sockpuppets of Runtshit turnes out red). I have used these templates: User:Deshmuck.. is there any fixed rules about which label to use when? Anyway; keep up the good work! Regards, Huldra 15:40, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
 * No problem. I used blockedsock which is just a simple way of saying it is a sock which has been blocked. I have always previously used sockpuppet for Runtshit socks. The difference between the two is whether the sockpuppet has been suspected or confirmed. It's a moot point really. You are welcome to change it. -- zzuuzz(talk) 15:47, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Block of 194.83.245.123
Hi Zzuuzz, you blocked 194.83.245.123 just over a week ago but they are back vandalising. Can the log in provision be made for longer (if that is what you did)? - Ctbolt 11:31, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Protection of Melina Perez
Thank you, --  The  Hyb  rid  00:22, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

What about the talk page? --  The  Hyb  rid  00:23, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Another Sock
, I found the name sitting in the user account creations log, probably a sleeper until it becomes established and then edit vandalize the Melina Perez article. Bmg 916 Speak to MeLeave Your Mark 00:39, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I've blocked the account as a rather obvious sockpuppet. -- zzuuzz(talk) 01:00, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Puppet question
Is there any point in going after sockpuppeting that is already a month or more old? I have never wandered into that area before. The short version of the story is that I did everything in my non-admin power to demonstrate that someone was a sockpuppet (or possibly meatpuppet), I believe that I did so quite thoroughly, was backed up by the suspicions of another, and finally nominated this sockpuppet's utterly bad-faith AfD of a well-sourced stub for speedy keep, on the (stated, with evidentiary links) accusation that the AfD was in bad faith and that this was a sockpuppet. The evidence is pretty clear to me, and I've laid it out well, but it probably needs checkuser and IP address digging that I can't do (or don't know how to do) to prove it more solidly. While this was going on, another sockpuppet of the same party sabotaged my RfA by reporting me as having savaged an innocent user in AfD (the first puppet). And this actually worked, because people didn't bother to read the big pile of evidence I had compiled about this being a socketpuppet but chose to see an admin candidate randomly attacking another user, and reflexively !voted oppose on me in large enough numbers I just said forget it and withdrew my nomination. I'd kind of like to get some vindication. &mdash; SMcCandlish &#91;talk&#93; &#91;contrib&#93; ツ 23:42, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Sometimes, you just have to look to the future. -- zzuuzz(talk) 01:17, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Noted, but both of these sockpuppets remain non-blocked users on the system; they have never "officially" been declared sockpuppets or run through WP:SSP, so it is in fact quite likely that they'll make trouble in the future. &mdash; SMcCandlish &#91;talk&#93; &#91;contrib&#93; ツ 01:55, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

User
He has been warned he is still doing it. Lakers 22:35, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
 * User:YankeeDoodle14? Sorry, there appear to be some caching problems. I will follow it up when it becomes possible. -- zzuuzz(talk) 22:39, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh its okay, he told me he can today because of April fools I'm kind of confused thanks. Lakers 22:46, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Cheers
Thanks for reverting the blanking of my talk page last night. Much appreciated. Will (aka  Wimt  ) 11:10, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Jorga.jpg
Ilija Jorga himself, and give me Licence for public domain. thanks for asking Snake bgd (talk • contribs) 11:11, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Recent Turkey vandalism
Hi, I saw you protected the article. Good move, it was becoming too much with the sock-puppets vandalizing the page. I was wondering though, after you set it to fully-protected, I don't see it in my watchlist. Is that the way it's supposed to behave? Thanks! -- Kimon talk 00:55, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I was wondering when the sockpuppets would run out, but they just keep coming. Yes protection has a magical effect on watchlists ;) -- zzuuzz(talk) 01:01, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Aha! Ok, that explains it :) -- Kimon talk 01:07, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

User:Jesup
Thanks for reverting the vandalism to my user page and talk page; I'm afraid my personal teenage vandal is back (Jacknicholson aka Marshallbanana aka Marshal2.0 and now Delat). — jesup 00:43, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
 * No problem, that background explains some things. I will keep an eye out for any further nonsense. -- zzuuzz(talk) 00:52, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Reverted Comments
You reverted a comment I made on Wikipedia reliablity...care to justify? Why is it that you are allowed to do this? The comments are factual and on topic on that page, yet you revert it and leave no comment! DaVoice 13:07, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Could you provide a link or diff? Thanks. I can only find this edit which reverted to your last edit. -- zzuuzz(talk) 13:08, 5 April 2007 (UTC)


 * 17:10, 3 April 2007 Zzuuzz (Talk | contribs) m (Reverted edits by 64.45.79.39 (talk) to last version by DaVoice) entry on | History of Wikipedia talk: About page DaVoice 13:18, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, as mentioned above, this was reverting an anon's test edits to your last version. -- zzuuzz(talk) 13:19, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Mentioned above? anon's test edits?  I'm sort of a newbie - what are you talking about? DaVoice 13:26, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
 * The link I provided just above shows the diff. If you look on the left you will see the edits I removed - basically nonsense. I have just reverted more test edits to the same page - ones which removed your comments. So I restored your comments. Maybe that explains the confusion. Let me know if I can help further. -- zzuuzz(talk) 13:29, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Uhhh? ;) Thanks! DaVoice 13:33, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Recreation and Recreation on wheels
Could you please do me a favor and move Recreation on wheels back to Recreation so we don't lose the article history? I manually restored Recreation but didn't realize I erased all the article history with it. Thanks much! Casey Abell 21:38, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Done. -- zzuuzz(talk) 21:47, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the very quick response. Casey Abell 21:48, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!
Thanks for the revert om my user page. Cheers.. :O) Flowerpotman talk-wot I've done 19:31, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
 * No problem. -- zzuuzz(talk) 19:42, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Help please
Hello. I am hoping that you are still online. I thought that I could move the Zach Johnson dab page to Zach Johnson (disambiguation) and then move Zach Johnson (golfer) to Zach Johnson, but it won't allow me to make the second move. This is a golfer who just won the Masters in the last hour. Can you please make the move? I'll clean up any necessary redirects. --After Midnight 0001 23:31, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Done. There's a lot of redirects to change. -- zzuuzz(talk) 23:37, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Most of the articles are linked from a template, but I'll get them all. Thanks for the speedy help.  --After Midnight 0001 23:42, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
 * No problem. I've done the template, and a few others. -- zzuuzz(talk) 23:44, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Looks like I'm almost done, only one I'm not sure if I should change is Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Biography articles by quality/309 or if that's supposed to be left alone. --After Midnight 0001 00:08, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Looks like the bot will update it in a few days, but I see no harm in changing it, or check back in a few days. -- zzuuzz(talk) 00:16, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Help
Hi there; as a new admin, I would be most grateful for a little information. You just blocked User:Mr. PoopyMcPoopface, obviously correctly, for violation of WP:USERNAME policy. Could you please share with me the format of the template which you have used to notify this user of the situation: I am having some difficulty in reverse-engineering it.--Anthony.bradbury 13:10, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

That would be, no? --Guinnog 13:13, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Indeed. It should be buried in the source code somewhere. It was usernameblock (or unb). Account creation was left enabled and autoblock turned off, giving the benefit of the doubt. -- zzuuzz(talk) 13:14, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks
Thank you for your welcome. Sicilianshotgun 18:53, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
 * You're welcome! You seem to be doing fine, but feel free to drop any questions here. -- zzuuzz(talk) 19:42, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

WP:CSD
Advice, please, because my mop and bucket are still new and shiny. If this page is going to attract vandals, should we protect it? And will it still work properly if we do?--Anthony.bradbury 21:35, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
 * You mean the category? It would still work, but it doesn't get nearly enough vandalism to warrant protection. I read recently, I think it was User:Xiner who said they use a rule of thumb of ten vandal edits a day before thinking about protection. It sounds about right to me, though there are always cases of .. sometimes more, sometimes less. To get a good idea, hang around WP:RFPP. Some articles around here have been built almost entirely by unregistered editors, they fix vandalism, and improve even official Wikipedia policy articles. So protection should be used sparingly. -- zzuuzz(talk) 21:45, 10 April 2007 (UTC)


 * OK, fair enough with an ordinary mainspace article. My point really was that WP:CSD is a fundamental working page, and if it gets vandalised then it make using it more difficult. But whatever you say, that's why I asked. I know about WP:RFPP.--Anthony.bradbury 22:56, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
 * The page is on a lot of people's watchlists, so any vandalism would be quickly fixed. Instead of saying that vandalism would make it worse, maybe consider how unregistered editors might improve it. Opinions will always differ, but there is a general consensus that protection should not be used pre-emptively (even though it sometimes is). There's a discussion about it currently at WT:PPOL. -- zzuuzz(talk) 23:04, 10 April 2007 (UTC)